Decline of the western society #3

Some 70% of Japanese parents with babies up to one year old would like to have more children, according to a recent survey. Those who selected the “difficult” response were asked to select multiple reasons for giving that answer. Over 80% said that it was due to the cost of another child.

kvs wrote:Japan is subservient to the NATzO west and its woke degeneracy agenda.   So we have this xenophobic nationalist state now opening
up migration to compensate for its population decline induced by feminism.

higurashihougi wrote:

Please stop whitewashing the crime of capitalism by demonizing women. Because it is simply untrue, and it is morally wrong.

AlfaT8 wrote:And oh, here we go again the great boogieman "capitalism".
What's Vietnam's fertility rate right now?.....lets see, 2.013, wow, barely skimping through.
Clearly socialism is NOT the answer.

All billionaires under 30 have inherited their wealth, research finds
Fifteen young billionaires are among the first wave of a $5.2tn transfer of wealth by the ageing super-rich

All of the world’s billionaires younger than 30 inherited their wealth, the first wave of “the great wealth transfer” in which more than 1,000 wealthy people are expected to pass on more than $5.2tn (£4.1tn) to their heirs over the next two decades.

There are already more billionaires than ever before (2,781), and the number is expected to soar in the coming years as an elderly generation of super-rich people prepare to give their fortunes to their children.

Research by Forbes magazine found there were 15 billionaires aged 30 or under but that none had created their own wealth, instead benefitting from huge inheritances.

From rags to riches?  It's a myth.

All of the world’s billionaires younger than 30 inherited their wealth. Research by Forbes magazine found there were 15 billionaires aged 30 or under but that none had created their own wealth, instead benefiting from huge inheritances.

Grotesque levels of wealth are being passed on to the next generation perpetuating inequality.   Experts at the Swiss bank UBS said: “During the next 20 to 30 years, over 1,000 of today’s billionaires are likely to transfer more than $5.2tn to their heirs. How do we calculate this number? Simply by adding up the wealth of the 1,023 billionaires who are aged 70 or more today."

A total of $70tn is expected to be inherited by the next generation over the next 20 years, according to estimates by the consulting firm Cerulli Associates. The transfer is expected to make millennials the “richest generation in history”, says research by the real estate agent Knight Frank.

GarryB wrote:

You wanna believe in your socialist lala land of equality, go ahead, this nonsense is happening everywhere.
And it is directly tied to increase in "women's Rights".

There are no womens rights groups in Russia because women get all the same rights men get.

Linking fertility to womens rights is just silly, because if some women got all the rights they wanted then they would increase the fertility rate as women realise being a good stay at home mother is much easier than trying the be a full time mother and working full time on her own.

Being able to have sex with different men and get pregnant all the time and being able to demand those men pay for the upbringing of that child should increase fertility rates because we all know some women are always pregnant to different men all the time to allow them to live off benefits and payments from the babies fathers.

What's Vietnam's fertility rate right now?.....lets see, 2.013, wow, barely skimping through.
Clearly socialism is NOT the answer.

But you are the one that claims it is democracy and extra rights for women that is the problem... do Vietnamese women get extra rights like western women do?

Is there a minister of Womans Affairs in Vietnam like there is in New Zealand?

So what ?

What are you going to do ?

Even if we are struggling with the birth rate and the consequences of that, it has nothing to do with your prejuidiced stereotype of genders, and it does not give you any position to lecture us or to demand us anything.

We don't have the obligation to give birth just to satisfy your desire.

Why do we have to make children just because you want us to ? Who are you to us ? God ? Son of Man ? Reincarnated Jesus ? Or just a nobody hiding behind a nickname to freely posting irritating stupid comments without having several punches to the face ?

What will you provide to us if you want us to breed ? Do you provide assistance in childcare ? Do you work for us during the period of parental leaves ? Do you buy milk, book, do you pay tuition fee for us ? Or are you willing to negotiate with the related institution for a wage rise and reduce of prices and fees ?

Or you just siting there, hiding behind the computer and blabbering nonsense which have nothing to do with reality and contribute nothing to address the issue ?

There is nothing feminism or hyper-gamy or whatever in this, it is just the most realistic needs that any human is concerning about: rice, clothes, job, money.

If you have never raised a child before then STFU.

It have never been easy to create a new human, including the ones with moral disorder like you.

AlfaT8 wrote:Dude, Democracy is a dead end religion, and as i have said before both Western liberals and eastern socialist, be it through egalitarianism or socialism/communism, both in their own way pursue equality, and for that reason both have failed miserably.

Investors are excited by much stronger than expected net jobs rise in the US in March - up 303k.

But this figure will probably be revised down next month. Most jobs gained were in healthcare and government. Little rise at all in other sectors, including manufacturing, information and finance.

And the new jobs were all part-time; full-time jobs declined. So, yes more jobs but at low pay with no security or benefits.

GarryB wrote:

Child support has been a reality for a while Garry, where are those high fertility rates??

The Urban West is not the third world where 90% of children die before their 14th birthday... why do we need all these extra people for in the first place?

Dude, Democracy is a dead end religion, and as i have said before both Western liberals and eastern socialist, be it through egalitarianism or socialism/communism, both in their own way pursue equality, and for that reason both have failed miserably.

When you base your views on the actions and achievements of extremists then of course they appear bad, but full hard core individualism does not work... because that would be chaos... no tax, but also no roads or public schools or healthcare etc etc... why would you obey the orders of a privately owned police force?

I get it Garry, there is no ideal solution here, this is a Machiavellian bad or worst choice situation.
You either take women's rights away or be replaced and become nothing but dust in the history books, those are the terms Garry, pick your poison.

Women have rights, not sure how you could possibly take that away. Most people could care less about politics yet they are encouraged to vote about something they don't know much about or care about. How does that effect the results?

Lots of problems in the world and none of the potential solutions includes more people.

Who gives a **** about fertility rates?

I already know your answer Garry, because most people in the West have made egalitarianism their absolute sacred cow, it is the hill that you will die on, and death is assured.

I will be dead long before population is a problem... there was a time when they feared the worlds population would mushroom out of control, in the last few centuries it has massively increased but now not so much.

You see the bacteria is getting close to the edge of the dish and conditions are no longer ideal for rapid massive growth any more.

Then die.
Die and become nothing more than a memory, whoever replaces you won't make the same mistake as you did.

Everybody dies, and everyone makes mistakes, over and over again.

How many really achieve true immortality?

But who cares... I will be dead so I don't give a **** who will miss me.

higurashihougi wrote:
@Garry: honestly speaking, I do not know, whether it would be a right thing to do if our forum's moderators grant Alfa the taste of an anti-democratic environment that he has been desiring for a long long time.

lyle6 wrote:You don't even have to go that far to solve the fertility crisis. Instead of going immediately to college women should marry and have kids in their late teens early 20s right at their maximum fertility and energy, pop up 2-3 kids in 3 years: many countries have mandatory conscription for males of about that period so they're not missing out. Then thay can go to college and have the career that they always wanted...  

The fact that most women don't even realize this is an option should be grounds for stripping them of their rights. Our societies risk collapse because women are too stupid to figure out the ticking time bombs that is their fertility and will happily waste the limited time on stupid shit like attending college.  

GarryB wrote:

Why??... ok, so in your view their is no fertility crisis.

8 billion is plenty... in fact we are having trouble looking after that many... most don't have proper shelter or clean water or food.

Do you not get it Garry?... both sides East or West have chosen equality as their highest value, 2 different roads, same goddamn destination, either utter collapse or all out replacement.

The west is for the individual, while the east is more of a collective group... if anyone was going to get this right it would be as a group.

Don't know what Ancap is.

That's right Garry, they vote, they voted for stupid sh*t for so long across a number of generations that we are now screwed.

Oh please.... you are blaming the fact that women get to vote for the quality of who is running for elections in the west?

Western politicians are scum because the people who fund them want to control them... their investment is not charity... they want returns on their investments so of course they will fund both sides and make sure the people who care about people never get anywhere near elections.

As Mark Twain said... if voting actually mattered they wouldn't let you do it.

Don't worry, most Westerners are like that.

I think women are as stupid as men and if men can vote then so should women. Actually I think the voting age should be 65 and over, because anyone younger than that has no idea about life and the future of everyone and your grandchildren.

Not you, so don't complain later in life when the new arrivals start taking over.

So I am not allowed to complain?

**** off.

Oohh, the Boomer position, it ain't my problem, because i will be dead and gone, to hell with the next generation.
Ok, fair enough Mr.Boomer.

So you pull labels from your arse and that is how you form your view and communicate in this discussion?

Yea, but mistakes that wipe-out your entire race are on quite a different level, that many would hardly describe as a simple "mistake", but instead a civilizational F'up of biblical proportions.

My race is human and why do you think it is going to last forever?

We don't care about the people on earth now, why would more people make things better?

Ok Boomer, so to you, we can start taking womens rights away only after your dead, so that "YOU" wont have to feel responsible.
A true Boomer move, if ever was one.

In many western countries the females outnumber the males by a small margin... how do you suggest you take away their right... and of course even if you could MANage that, what is to stop all women deciding to be male and just voting anyway.

Anyway, we are fast approaching the Rubicon, hard decision are gonna have to be made.

No we aren't. There are lots of things that will thin our numbers but to actually wipe us all out would require a very significant event like a serious impact from space or a particularly virulent disease... or perhaps AI.

Any of which wont be impacted very much whether there are 8 billion or 20 billion of us.

All eyes are on China, since they don't have to worry about "the female vote", China can actually make the hard calls.
Granted, i don't believe they will be in any hurry.

China is a good example where men and womens votes count... except you have to join the communist party and be an active member before you get to vote. I fully support that because you need to be politically active and understand politics before you should be allowed to make any decisions that effect the future of the country.

When there are no orphanages then there is a baby problem... otherwise...

Moral of the story, educating women is a very bad idea.

Bullshit... if they had sent their men the men likely would have stayed in the city too.

What makes more sense is a more mechanised farm where they don't need lots of peasants to get the crops in, and to make the work easier... so even women can do it.